brickipediafandomcom-20200229-history
Forum:LEGO2013Helper
Recently, while in chat, LEGO2013Helper admited to be CM4S. Apparently Clone already knew. Anyway, if y'all are wondering how CM4S made another account, it's my fault. A couple of months ago, before the permablock, CM4S was talking about his little brother Parker (I think). Apparenly he wanted to make an account, and with CJC's consent, I unticked CM4S' "no make more accounts" box. Well after, for some reason, Parker couldn't make an account, I forgot to retick the box. So that is why CM4S made this new account. I just want to say 2013 has been a really good user. So good in fact that if he had been around for another week or two, I would have nominated him for chat moderator. I propose we let him stay. 2013 is extremely different than CM4S and even better than CM4S was when he was trying to be good (on his last warning). As far as I'm concerned CM4S was a bad, troublemaking user but 2013 is a new, good, helpfull user. Vote below. Let 2013 stay #Per my above statement. 14:25, November 4, 2012 (UTC) # I also believe he should stay, and I will argue on your statement a bit, Darth Henry. CM4S is as much of a good user he is now. He just got a little mad when mods started banning him all the time. #I think he should stay :D. He's a cool user and I think if he stays that we, then he can stay. If the good behavior ends (hopefully it won't), then he goes. #Other than a few moments where he has been sort of rude, he has been a much better user. I'm not giving him a fourth chance though. 18:47, November 4, 2012 (UTC) #This again? Sure, I guess. 21:37, November 4, 2012 (UTC) #Only a basis that he knows that if he screws up, he's goneski. -- 21:39, November 4, 2012 (UTC) #I was actually aware that he was CM4S for quite a while, after Clone dropped a hint and I had noticed some suspicious similarities. Even though there has been trouble in the past, I don't think he is an issue at the moment. 23:14, November 4, 2012 (UTC) #Honestly, I always thought CM4S' original ban should've been a permanent block from chat but still allowed to edit, so sure, I'm ok with him being allowed back. But per Czech above as well of course, and he is being watched. 23:25, November 4, 2012 (UTC) # ^ 13:01, November 5, 2012 (UTC) Make 2013 leave Neutral *Sockpuppets used to evade bans are against the policy, but if he's acting fine, then IDC if he's not blocked. :) Comments *I hope I'm allowed to add a comments section, but uh, thanks, Henry for making this. None of this is your fault to begin with. I was a real jerk to people back then... and now I've changed. The past 3 months have been well for me, no anger spazzes or what not. I'm no longer the mean person I was in the past. I just want to help edit. /endcheesyapology I'm sorry, :) --LEGO2013Helper (talk) 15:13, November 4, 2012 (UTC) *Henry you should read the admin forum more often. ~ CJC 15:52, November 4, 2012 (UTC) * Also, RFC, forum not needed, fail to see why it is an issue that requires community consensus. ~ CJC 20:45, November 4, 2012 (UTC) ** Well, it was decided that CM4S should be permanently blocked due to a forum, so it makes sense to me to have one for unblocking :S 23:25, November 4, 2012 (UTC) *** Did we? I can find a forum called Blocking CM4S that was closed instantly, a forum called un-ban CM4S that was rejected (although it was later reduced from perma anyway) and a demod forum. ~ CJC 17:08, November 5, 2012 (UTC)